Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 7 Jun 2008 11:53:20 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] RFC: Moving firmware blobs out of the kernel. |
| |
Hi!
> > > The firmware is an independent and separate work in itself. Section 2 of > > > the GPL talks about such sections of the work, explicitly. The only way > > > to excuse what we're doing at the moment is to call it 'mere > > > aggregation' -- an exception which was intended to handle stuff like the > > > 'freeware' CDs on the covers of magazines, distributing a bunch of > > > unrelated software. Not a coherent work combining software from > > > different sources into a single entity which works closely together as > > > one, and where one part is useless without the other. > > > > Wait a moment, haven't you just described linux distribution? > > > > I mean, if aggregation clause does not work for firmware in kernel, > > why would it work for packages in distro? > > > > (Actually, seeing some distro EULAs, I wished GPL infected whole > > distro so that I'd not have to read the stupid EULA.) > > That's an interesting question, which has concerned me in the past. > There are certainly those who would claim that the distribution _is_ a > collective work, and not just 'mere aggregation on a volume of a storage > or distribution medium'. Which poses interesting questions. > > I think you might _just_ about get away with arguing to the contrary, as > long as you never refer to the distribution as a collective work which > is copyrightable in its own right, or try to put a EULA on it or > anything like that. At least it's _slightly_ more excusable in that case > than what we were talking about before.
Well, distos I seen, did try to claim whole distro is collective work, and did have eula in the front :-(.
> > > There are people who own copyright on firmware who refuse to put it into > > > the Linux source tree, because their lawyers don't believe the 'mere > > > aggregation' line, and believe that including it in the kernel source in > > > any form would require them to license it under the GPL. > > > > They can release the firmware under BSD 3-clause, and we can include > > it in kernel, then.... right? (Or into linux-firmware or into whatever > > package that comes handy). > > You may only include it in a GPL'd project if you can distribute the > source code in the preferred form for editing -- unless you claim that
Oops, you are right; I overlooked that.
-- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |